Prophet Jesus Crucifiction In Bible

[Mohsin]

I know from our islamic viewpoint Prophet Jesus wasn't crucified, he was raised up etc, and one of his companions was given his likeness etc.
But my question is who is the person in the Bible that speaks to the disciples after the alleged crucifiction.In the Bile they say it's Jesus. What is the islamic viewpoint and persepective on this person, and how this story could have arisen
I've always heard how nowhere in the Bible does it teach trinity, or Jesus AS himself say he's son of god etc., and when i saw that there was a talk by Zakir Naik on Jesus AS alleged crucifiction, i thought again, like the other issues it'd probs prove it never happened. Instead it proves that he wasn't crucified, but rather crucificted, ie they didn't quite kill him he didn't die and came back to talk to them. I didn't quite understand what the point of proving this was, as Dr Naik was almost, if you like, teaching that Jesus AS spoke to the disciples after the alleged crucifiction which goes against Quran doesn't it? Or did he mean something else from this?
Basically the question is what is the islamic viewpoint on the events taking place after the alleged crucifiction, do we believe its just a fabrictaed story? As muslims obviously we believe this, but to a christian he would say there were all these witnesses that saw him after the crucifiction, were all of them lieing?

 

[*Hana*]

Salam Alaikum Brother:

Christians believe Jesus died on the cross, was buried and was then ressurected after 3 days. Dr. Naik is explaining that there is no way He died on the cross, therefore, no resurrection.

In order for Jesus to have been resurrected, He would have had to be in the spiritual form which means like the angels. He wouldn't require food, drink, sleep, etc. However, Jesus was very much alive when He spoke to the disciples because He tells them, "Look at my hands, my feet. It's me, Jesus." He tells them he's not a spirit as a spirit doesn't have skin and bones as he does. He then asks for food as there is no need for spirits to eat. Remember too, the bible says you can only die ONCE, and then there is resurrection.

So, what Dr. Naik is saying is that Jesus, contrary to what Christians believe, was NOT resurrected at all. He was very much alive AFTER the supposed crucifixion. They say their entire salvation is based on this resurrection...but as Dr. Naik as explained, the resurrection didn't happen. Jesus was very much alive, was not spiratual. No resurrection....No salvation.

Hope that explains it.

Wa'alaikum salam
Hana

 

[mansio]

Any proofs of Mr Naik's assertions ?

 

[Mohsin]

Sister Hana, he's trying to refute the christians thought using the bible, i'm saying we as muslims don't believe that he got crucified, or that he got crucificted, which is what Dr Naik is trying to prove. We don't believe he survived the attempted crucifiction because as muslims we believe he was raised up alive, so i don't know why Dr Naik is trying to prove something we don't believe, regardless of wether it proves the Christian way of thought to be wrong
Anyway my question was what is the muslim perspective on the person that spoke to the disciples after the alleged crucifiction, because as muslims we obviously don't believe it was Jesus AS, as he was raised up, so who is this person? is this story made up? It just seems weird that so many people together made up such a story

Any proofs of Mr Naik's assertions ?

Zakir Naik proved his assertions that he got crucificted, rather than crucified in a debate. He proved it using the Bible. The talk isn't actually available on the net, but there is one by Ahmed Deedat, who was Dr Naiks teacher. You can listen to that here, its called "Crucifixion Or Crucifiction"
http://is.aswatalislam.net/DisplayFilesP.aspx?TitleID=2013&TitleName=Ahmed_Deedat

 

[QURBAN]

In the name of Allah, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful!

Praise be to God,
the Cherisher and Sustainer of the worlds;

Peace to those who follow the Guidence!

That they said (in boast), "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Apostle of God";- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not:-

Holy Quran Surah Nisa (4:157)

 

[Mohsin]

In the name of Allah, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful!

Praise be to God,
the Cherisher and Sustainer of the worlds;

Peace to those who follow the Guidence!

That they said (in boast), "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Apostle of God";- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not:-

Holy Quran Surah Nisa (4:157)

jazakallah khair for post bro, ut unfotunately still don't answer my question

 

[Benny]

So, what Dr. Naik is saying is that Jesus, contrary to what Christians believe, was NOT resurrected at all. He was very much alive AFTER the supposed crucifixion. They say their entire salvation is based on this resurrection...but as Dr. Naik as explained, the resurrection didn't happen. Jesus was very much alive, was not spiratual. No resurrection....No salvation.

Hope that explains it.

Wa'alaikum salam
Hana

I think I'm seeing the difference between Islam and Christianity. If Dr. Naik said the same thing about Islam, gunmen would be showing up at his door. I think it's rather preculiar that Muslims can denounce Christianity, yet, Christians aren't allowed to denounce Islam. Why is that I wonder? I'm sorry, I don't mean to be offensive, I'm just curious by nature, and find it odd.

 

[Muhammad]

Greetings,

I think I'm seeing the difference between Islam and Christianity. If Dr. Naik said the same thing about Islam, gunmen would be showing up at his door.

A rather stereotyped opinion, I must say.

I think it's rather preculiar that Muslims can denounce Christianity, yet, Christians aren't allowed to denounce Islam. Why is that I wonder? I'm sorry, I don't mean to be offensive, I'm just curious by nature, and find it odd.

Since when are Christians "not allowed" to denounce Islam? If they see a problem, they are most welcome to bring it forth and clarify it with Muslims. Likewise, Muslims discuss what seem like discrepancies in Christianity to see whether there is any explanation for them.

Peace.

 

[Benny]

Greetings,

A rather stereotyped opinion, I must say.

Probably, That's why I'm here to dispell all the steriotypes in my mind that I've seen and have been exposed to.

Since when are Christians "not allowed" to denounce Islam? If they see a problem, they are most welcome to bring it forth and clarify it with Muslims. Likewise, Muslims discuss what seem like discrepancies in Christianity to see whether there is any explanation for them.

Peace.

There was that rushdie dude that wrote that book. they were hunting him down. There's the gunmen that protest the cartoon publishers (technically not denounce, but along the same spirit). There is 2 off the top of my head.

Like I said, I'm an outsider looking in on all this. I can only ask my questions to gain insight.
Peace

Benny

 

[Muhammad]

Greetings Benny,

Probably, That's why I'm here to dispell all the steriotypes in my mind that I've seen and have been exposed to.

I am glad you are open minded about that then .

There was that rushdie dude that wrote that book. they were hunting him down. There's the gunmen that protest the cartoon publishers (technically not denounce, but along the same spirit). There is 2 off the top of my head.

There is a slight confusion here, which I think we need to clarify. There are some people who debate matters of religion with members of other faiths in a respectful, evidence-based manner to promote understanding and sometimes try to make known the distinction between what is true and what cannot be. I believe this is the case with Dr. Zakir Naik.

Other people produce slanderous, blasphemous publications such as books and magazines which serve no purpose other than mere entertainment and totally lack any respect or evidence. Hence it is these that create hatred.

So to conclude: it is most acceptable to have people discuss matters in a civilised way, but outright insult is not tolerated by anyone.

Peace.

 

[Benny]

Greetings Benny,

I am glad you are open minded about that then .

I'm trying to be at every moments of my life.

There is a slight confusion here, which I think we need to clarify. There are some people who debate matters of religion with members of other faiths in a respectful, evidence-based manner to promote understanding and sometimes try to make known the distinction between what is true and what cannot be. I believe this is the case with Dr. Zakir Naik.

I understand, but it in fact, the good dr is saying that Christianity is a lie if I'm reading correctly. I think they believe that the resurection is the heart of thier belief.(from what I understand). I think I'm confused about this.

Other people produce slanderous, blasphemous publications such as books and magazines which serve no purpose other than mere entertainment and totally lack any respect or evidence. Hence it is these that create hatred.

---

It's good to hear that people are speaking out. You have any links or sites I can see? The news here has yet to mention it. I'd like to pass it along to the the record straight about that.

So to conclude: it is most acceptable to have people discuss matters in a civilised way, but outright insult is not tolerated by anyone.

Peace.

I dig what you're saying. If it seems I'm insulting, then you are mistaken. I'm just trying to understand better.
thanks for the clarifications,

Peace,
Benny

 

[Mohsin]

I understand, but it in fact, the good dr is saying that Christianity is a lie if I'm reading correctly. I think they believe that the resurection is the heart of thier belief.(from what I understand). I think I'm confused about this.

Yes we don't believe in chrstianity, we believe its a lie that Jesus PBUH was resurrected, if we did believe that we wouldn't be muslim....we would be christian!
Similarly christians don't believe in Prophet Muhammed PBUH, they don't believe he was a prophet, they think he was a liar and they think islam is false, so hence they are not muslims.....they're christians
So theres nothing wrong with Dr Naik saying Jesus PBUH was not crucified

Anyway i think you're confused on what is Dr Naiks purpose, he believes in christianity and in prophet Jesus PBUH, but according to islam he wasn't crucified, and he's trying to prove it to christians using their bible. if it says in the bible he wasn't crucified then how can he possibly be saying christianity is a lie

 

[Muhammad]

Greetings,

It's good to hear that people are speaking out. You have any links or sites I can see? The news here has yet to mention it. I'd like to pass it along to the the record straight about that.

Have a look at today's story, and also see the following:

Muslim leader condemns protesters

Pressure on police over protest
...
Meanwhile, Inayat Bunglawala, a spokesman for the Muslim Council of Britain, said that Muslims would be in favour of arresting those who waved offensive placards or banners.
He told Channel 4 News: "I think the police were right to have taken footage of the event and identified the ringleaders, because although several hundred people were there, the actual placards were being held by a tiny group of extremists."
He added: "Those extremists who were inciting violence were trying to hijack genuine feelings amongst Muslims for a more violent agenda.
"There will be no sympathy for them when they are charged by the police."

The Labour MP Shahid Malik, who is on the Home Affairs Select Committee, wrote a letter to Sir Ian Blair, head of the Met Police, on Friday calling for prosecutions.
He said he had every confidence suitable action would be taken.
Mr Malik added: "Police are professionals at dealing with crowd and disorder matters and I think they're best placed to make those kinds of judgements. "I believe that prosecutions should follow. No matter how much offence cartoons may or may not cause, it can never justify violence." SOURCE

Dr Yunes Teinaz is the spokesman for the London Mosque and Islamic Cultural Centre
...

Muslim governments have the right to boycott Danish and Norwegian goods. On the other hand, the way forward is to solve this amicably. Any violent threats against Danish, or other, people are completely unacceptable. We believe the governments that allowed these freedoms to be abused should apologise to the Muslim communities. SOURCE

I dig what you're saying. If it seems I'm insulting, then you are mistaken. I'm just trying to understand better.

No, I didn't mean you were insulting... I was referring to the insulting behaviour demonstrated by the Danish media group and the likes of Salman Rushdie. We can accept criticism, but there is a point beyond which criticism becomes insult.

Peace.

 

[Benny]

No, I didn't mean you were insulting... I was referring to the insulting behaviour demonstrated by the Danish media group and the likes of Salman Rushdie. We can accept criticism, but there is a point beyond which criticism becomes insult.

Peace.

Thanks for the links!.... And thanks for not saying I'm insulting. I dont mean to convey anything insulting in my posts. I'll pass the links along. The question I have is: When is murder an option for someone that insults you? Salman Rushdie was threathened for writing a book. That's about absurd if you ask me. If you dont like the book dont read it. if you dont like the music, turn the channel. I don't feel a need to kill anyone that insults me.

Peace,
Benny

 

[Muhammad]

Greetings,

Thanks for the links!....

You're very welcome .

The question I have is: When is murder an option for someone that insults you? Salman Rushdie was threathened for writing a book. That's about absurd if you ask me.

Please see the following links:

Why is the apostate to be executed in Islam?

Apostasy: Definition & Ruling

The reasons for capital punishment in Islam

If you dont like the book dont read it. if you dont like the music, turn the channel. I don't feel a need to kill anyone that insults me.

The problem with publishing something such as a newspaper or book is that turning your face away will not stop it being broadcasted to a very large number of people. When such a publication constitutes slander and insult against a belief, then it is important to correct such things - by peaceful, Islamic means of course.

I have already clarified that the violence being portrayed by some Muslims is not justified for the cause and killing someone for an insult is not an idea that has been enforced by anyone here.

Btw, I found another link regarding Muslims condemning the violence:

http://www.islamonline.net/English/News/2006-02/06/article01.shtml

I hope this helps,

Peace.

 

[QURBAN]

Sister Hana, he's trying to refute the christians thought using the bible, i'm saying we as muslims don't believe that he got crucified, or that he got crucificted, which is what Dr Naik is trying to prove. We don't believe he survived the attempted crucifiction because as muslims we believe he was raised up alive, so i don't know why Dr Naik is trying to prove something we don't believe, regardless of wether it proves the Christian way of thought to be wrong
Anyway my question was what is the muslim perspective on the person that spoke to the disciples after the alleged crucifiction, because as muslims we obviously don't believe it was Jesus AS, as he was raised up, so who is this person? is this story made up? It just seems weird that so many people together made up such a story


Zakir Naik proved his assertions that he got crucificted, rather than crucified in a debate. He proved it using the Bible. The talk isn't actually available on the net, but there is one by Ahmed Deedat, who was Dr Naiks teacher. You can listen to that here, its called "Crucifixion Or Crucifiction"
http://is.aswatalislam.net/DisplayFilesP.aspx?TitleID=2013&TitleName=Ahmed_Deedat

In the name of Allah, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful!

Praise be to Allah,
the Cherisher and Sustainer of the worlds;


Peace to those who follow the Guidence!

Christian’s belief in the end result of the Crucifixion is that the Messiah (PBUH) died-

Doctor Zakir Naik and Ahmed Deedat in their respective lectures were questioning the end result of the Crucifixion, i.e. whether Jesus (PBUH) died or not- Not whether the Crucifixion event happened, hence the title of their debate- Crucifixion or CruciFiction

Fiction Means Invented story, they were questioning climax of the story, i.e. whether Jesus Died or not.

That they said (in boast), "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Apostle of God";- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not:-

Holy Quran Surah Nisa 4:157


After reading Surah Nisa 4:157 a reader may conclude that Allah (SWT) has Himself Revealed in His Own Words the;

"substitution of 'Isa (Jesus) with another man".

The wordings of the original Arabic text do not categorically speak of "substitution of 'Isa (a.s.) with another man".

Below are the other English translations by Muslims and non Muslim scholars for comparison:

1. Translation by Allama Abdullah Yusuf Ali:
"But they killed him not, nor crucified him,
only a likeness of that was shown to them."

2. Translation by Mohammed Marmaduke Pickthall:
"...They slew him not nor crucified
but it appeared so unto them;"
3. Translation by Professor Arthur J. Arberry:
"...yet they did not slay him, neither crucified him,
only a likeness of that was shown to them."


In the above English translations the translators have refrained from advocating any specific theory since Allah (SWT) has not mentioned any of the prevalent theories on the subject in this verse or anywhere else in the Qur'an. (I repeat "in the Qur'an").

Muslim scholars have in the past advocated more than one theory which can be also regarded as an applicable interpretations of the phrase "but a likeness of that was shown to them". As for an example, Sheikh Ahmed Deedat had written a well publicized booklet 'Crucifixion or Cruci-fiction' based upon the so called "Swoon Theory".
(The word "swoon" means; to faint).

Dr Zakir Naik, also used the same arguments in his debate-

It is not my place to judge or to declare which theory is the Reality. All I am trying to emphasize is that since Allah (SWT) has not categorically declared "Jesus was substituted with another man", the factual translation should leave the doors open for the alternate theory or theories.. In Surah Al- 'Imran (3), verse 7, Allah (SWT) clearly reveals that no one knows "the true meanings" of the verses that are not entirely clear, except Allah.

Allah knows the Realities...

 

[Mohsin]

The crucifixion should also be considered from the Romans' side. They were neither Jews nor Christians. Do you think they would have crucified a non-entity or a ghost? If the crucifixion did happen then there must have been someone on the cross. The question is who?

Like Br. said, God put someone else on the cross. It is said he gave the likeness of Prophet Jesus PBUH's face to one of his companions, and Jesus PBUH was risen up. So one of his companions who appeared to look like Jesus PBUH was crucified.
It's quite clear it wasn't Jesus PBUh on the cross anyway, if you read the bible it claims Jesus PBUH said "My God why have you forsaken me"
I mean would a prophet say this to his lord, or a son say this to his apparent father, they world surely have the greatest faith and trust in God
Anyway it doesn't seem like i'll be getting the answer to my question, Allah Knows Best i guess

 

[- Qatada -]

One could also wonder why the new Christian religion spread like bushfire and their members were ready to sacrifice themselves as "shahids", if it was based on the crucifixion of the wrong person.

Its kinda simple. Most of the christians think they'll get to paradise no matter what they do in this life. They feel that they dont have to perform any sacrifices in this life, as long as you believe that Jesus will grant you paradise because you believed in him. This appeals to the people who have alot in this life, but still - most of the people who aren't having a good time in this life feel that there is a reason for this life - why are we alive if Jesus (peace be upon him) was going to grant me paradise anyway?


This life is here for a reason.


Us muslims believe that this life is a test from Allaah Almighty (God.) He sent us to this world, and we all have to try our best to strive to get to paradise. This means, sacrificing your wealth to support the needy, and to worship God alone without any partners. This means fighting in jihad (to end all oppression) and to enjoin people to the truth (to islamic monotheism.)

A person wont get paradise just because he believes, but because they have done righteous deeds aswell as believing in monotheism. Its like an exam, and whoever gets the pass & gets most marks (more good deeds), will get a higher rank in paradise. Whereas a person with less, will get a lower rank in paradise (each equal to their level of deeds in this life.)


However, whoever rejects Allaah Almighty (God) as the true God without any partners. They will get the hellfire due to their rejection of God. Why should God grant paradise to the one who rejected Him Almighty?


Hope you understand what i mean


wa Allaahu a'lam. (and Allaah Almighty knows best.)


Peace.

 

[QURBAN]

In the name of Allah, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful!

Praise be to God,
the Cherisher and Sustainer of the worlds;



Peace to those who follow the Guidance!

Benny, it looks like you have been banned, May Allah guide you in your quest for the truth-

for the rest of our Christians friends who might share the same views- first of all I would like to Thank you for giving us the opportunity to communicate and discuss the truth which we all need to know and follow. It is only by means of this, I mean by knowing the truth and following it, that we can free ourselves of our sins, as it says in your Bible:

“Then you will know the truth and the truth will set you free”

John 8:31 – New International Version (NIV)


A family decides to hold a picnic on top of a very high hill , and some one else was also present in that place, he was leaning against the tree, near the edge of the hill, and admiring the view from the top, during which the family are busy enjoying their picnic- after a while the baby starts to crawl away from his family members, and towards the edge of the hill, before too long the mother notices that her baby is very close to the edge, and starts screaming at the man to stop the baby- but he just stands their minding his own business and let the inevitable happen-

Baby is unaware of the path he has taken, which will to lead to a tragic end, but the man knows better- now he can mind his own business and let it be, or try and help the baby back to the right path-

Muslims believe that the Holy Quran is the word of God, and its against the Christians belief.

““Surely, they have disbelieved who say: ‘Allaah is the Messiah [‘Eesa (Jesus)], son of Maryam (Mary).’ But the Messiah [‘Eesa (Jesus)] said: ‘O Children of Israel! Worship Allaah, my Lord and your Lord.’ Verily, whosoever sets up partners (in worship) with Allaah, then Allaah has forbidden Paradise to him, and the Fire will be his abode. And for the Zaalimoon (polytheists and wrongdoers) there are no helpers”

[al-Maa'idah 5:72] “


and I am sure the Christians Belief that the Bible is the word of God, and they believe the Muslims are the ones in darkness.

You see both of us cannot be right, if we both believe in one God then he wont send two contradictory messages- two paths going opposite direction cannot lead to the same place- we believe that we are on the right path, and we fill its our duty to advise our fellow Christians Brothers/Sisters, not just mind our own business, admiring the view like the selfish guy did in my little story.

“Say (O Muhammad): ‘O people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians): Come to a word that is just between us and you, that we worship none but Allaah (Alone), and that we associate no partners with Him, and that none of us shall take others as lords besides Allaah.’ Then, if they turn away, say: ‘Bear witness that we are Muslims’”

Aal ‘Imraan 3:64


What Dr Zakir Naik was doing is inviting people to the Truth, by refuting the death of Christ on the Cross; the rebuttal was put forward with Proofs\Evidence from the bible, which he probably felt would have a stronger impact on the Christians audience then if he provided it from the Holy Quran.

And Allah Knows Best

 

[Mohsin]

Why has Benny been banned, what's he done wrong?